Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLskyline
I find spending $3.7 billion on Turcot quite excessive as well. They should do the absolute minimum, and make a really simple interchange, while avoiding expropriating land as much as possible.
However, 26 stations seems a bit exaggerated. The Laval Metro extension cost $745 million for 3 stations, which works to $248.3 million each. $3.7 billion would more likely buy around 15 stations (and roughly 26km of new track) - ignoring inflation. You're probably thinking of the $143.2 million/km rather than the cost per station.
http://www.amt.qc.ca/corp_template.a...&LangType=1033
|
26 stations is right on the money, at least if we go by the most recent Laval extension using 2007 dollars.
Yes I'm going by $143.2 million per kilometer, but it's important to consider the above-average distance between stations in Laval. (Cartier to De La Concorde is 2.1km, Henri-Bourassa to De La Concorde is 1.5km, under a river I might add, etc.)
The average distance between stations in Montreal is less than 800m. If we assume that the 26 new stations would be average in distance (I actually went with 1km, which is above average) then we can estimate 26 stations.
1 station per kilometer, $143 million per kilometer = $143 million per station and hence 26 stations
Clearly if we plan on placing stations 2.1km apart, then we won't be able to build quite so many for the same money, but looking at the AMT's currently proposed stations, the distances are more in line with the 800m average than the Laval stations.
Also, the Laval extension was rather complicated and technical from an engineering perspective. They faced many case specific challenges.
A cut-and-cover operation under Pie-IX for example might even be cheaper than $143/kilometer (going by 2007 dollars).
It's impossible to know for sure how many stations we could build at this stage for $3.7 billion, but somewhere in the 20-26 range is likely, especially if some of those stations have above-ground or elevated portions.